About your Search

20120926
20121004
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3
's extremely difficult if not impossible for anyone to win statewide -- >> guest: steve, i disagree with that analysis. abraham lincoln was a third party in 1860. in 1856, you had the democratic party and the wig -- and abraham lincoln wasn't on the ballot in a number of states, particularly in the south, yet he won the election. he didn't win a majority of the popular vote, he won the majority of the electoral vote and in 1832, i would submit that there were two parties there and it was henry clay and andrew jackson and jackson won the overwhelming popular vote. back in 1824, there was certainly several different parties running and then, of course, john quincy adams won that race and that was -- you had at least three, maybe four, parties then. host: but even -- >> guest guest the electoral votes. host: but even if you take it to more recent campaigns, 1968, the caller referring to george wallace did get 46 electoral votes but didn't get close to winning the presidency, ross perot, '92 and '96, getting nearly 20 percent of the vote in '92 but not one electoral vote. guest: he got
how much he weighs and steve cropp's questions on "60 minutes pierre host: both the president and governor romney were featured on "60 minutes." were fair, the romney's online of withkelly. is there a parallel their debt guest: both candidates both did a "60 minutes." that asked them similar questions on the program. on the day that mitt romney was under attack by everybody, steve croft asking obama if mitt romney screw up -- that is the kind of thing that cbs is not holding him accountable. both candidates will do the syrupy things but mitt romney is doing press conferences and obama has not been doing press conferences. you can look at the research on this. president obama has done more one-on-one said downs then press conferences. he likes to control the message and he would rather sit down with barbara walters and have her ask them what superpower he would like to have. host: fredericksburg, va., an airline for democrats -- -- on our line for democrats -- caller: i get tired of them talking about liberal, biased media. if there was, do you think they will allow george bush
it benefits from industry and from congress. host: let's hear from steve, republican in florida. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. you pointed out the guest's article where he states that this agency is going to restore the american dream. you've got to be kidding. that is laughable. it sounds like obama and you did not build it. the american dream has been made by hard-working individual americans. no agency of the federal government can possibly ever restore that. my question is, how can you possibly claim that when it was a pseudo government agency, fannie and freddie, overseen by dodd adn frank, which caused the collapse of the financial system -- dodd and frank, giving loans to people that could never afford to pay them back? guest: i will just say that the idea that fannie and freddie would cause the financial crisis is widely held in some circles. i don't believe it's true. the cause of the financial crisis was the subprime mortgages that were peddled by firms that were not under the supervision of the federal government in any serious way, certainly not fannie and fredd
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)